Jimmy Connors Faces Backlash of Bold Take on Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal

With a legendary career of his own, Jimmy Connors has never been one to shy away from candid opinions. When he weighed in on the GOAT debate, fans and pundits alike were captivated by his contrarian viewpoint. Contrary to the popular sentiment that anoints Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal in the GOAT discussion, Connors suggested they weren’t enough for that recognition.

Connors proclaimed Novak Djokovic as the frontrunner to be the GOAT. He dismissed Federer and Nadal completely, stating, “they weren’t even the best of their era”. This pronouncement immediately ignited a heated discussion among fans of the sport, with Federer and Nadal supporters passionately defending their idols’ illustrious careers and contributions.

see also

Ivan Ljubicic Details What Made Roger Federer a True Genius

Connors’ perspective sheds light on a significant shift in the evaluation of tennis greatness. While past debates considered various factors such as overall performance, consistency, and rivalries, the present narrative increasingly centers around the number of Grand Slam titles won by the players that could be granted that prestigious qualification.

The Shifting Importance of Grand Slams

In a recent episode of his podcast Advantage Connors, he addressed the controversy surrounding his remarks on Federer and Nadal. He clarified, “I’m not saying and I never said that Federer and Nadal aren’t the great players that they are, I just said that there’s a new guy on the top of the heap, that’s all. And he’s won the most Grand Slams at the moment.”

Amidst the controversy generated among tennis fans worldwide by his remarks, Connors made sure to recognize the undeniable greatness of both Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal. The iconic character acknowledged their immense contributions to the sport and their impressive Grand Slam records.

Connors further emphasized his stance, “I was not saying that they are not great players and I’m not in the kiss-ass business anyway. I’m not going to say they are or if they’re not. They are and they’ve proven that for 15, 16, 17 years that they’ve been playing, with the amount of Grand Slams that they’ve won. I’m just saying that the rules were set on the importance of the Grand Slams.”